Transcript Highlights:

• They have the appeal process.
• They have the appeal process.
• they're a vital piece of this process they're a vital piece of this process and<01:42:43.360>
• <01:49:02.239> as interim during that appeal process as interim during that appeal process
• <03:15:41.479> the necessary information to process the necessary information to process the

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• recommendations to improve this process recommendations to improve this process ensuring<00:05:46.039
• from the Department there is no process from the Department there is no process to<00:33:51.559>
• <01:19:07.080> so injury during the birthing process so injury during the birthing process
• certified through through their process certified through through their process of<01:20:03.320>
• due process hearing.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Education Policy and Administration Committee heard testimony on HB 222, which would repeal the requirement that a chartered public school and the resident school district sign a memorandum of understanding on how students with disabilities will receive special education services. The prime sponsor, Rep. Peggy Balboni, said the bill was requested by the New Hampshire Association of Special Education Administrators and the New Hampshire Alliance for Public Charter Schools. She argued that federal and state law already require districts to provide FAPE and that the MOU requirement has created extra work, legal costs, and delays without improving services. She said many MOUs remain unsigned, but students are still receiving services and complaint numbers have not changed. Rep. Mooney also supported repeal, calling the MOU duplicative and impractical because IEPs and 504 plans already govern services. Testimony from Jane B. Brulu of the special education administrators’ association and Beth McLure of the charter schools alliance echoed that view, saying the MOU has not helped students, has added hours of work and legal fees, and has mostly been a source of disputes over funding and service costs. McLure said her school has worked with more than 15 districts and has always been able to reach agreements, though the first year of the requirement took substantial time and money. Committee members asked about the original purpose of the law, unsigned MOUs, and whether disputes could be resolved without the requirement. A representative from the Department of Education said the MOU was originally proposed to address reports that some students were not getting services on time and to provide some oversight, but the department has no authority to order charter schools or districts to agree and no appeal process if they cannot. The department also said it does not currently audit charter school special education services because it lacks authority to monitor charter schools directly, and it urged the committee to consider some alternative oversight if the MOU requirement is repealed. The hearing on HB 222 was then closed, and the committee announced it would begin the hearing on HB 699 after a short break.

Transcript Highlights:

• , year-long process, year-long process, uh, uh, uh, uh,<00:46:17.080> which,<00:46:17.560>
• process would take this long. process would take this long.
• other processing fees. other processing fees.
• Without due process.
• Anything to do with due process.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:18:42.400> the this is a court-ordered process. the this is a court-ordered process. the
• um get medication through the process um get medication through the process that<01:25:06.080>
• those values and ensure fair processes those values and ensure fair processes in<01:36:02.639>
• > even<01:38:27.760> provide procurement process doesn't even provide procurement process
• we are proposing have a mandated process we are proposing have a statebased<01:51:43.280> process

Bills: SB2936, SB2850, SB2851, SB2521

Keywords: accessible parking, disability, kupuna, public accommodations, small business exemptions, Hawaii Revised Statutes, parking permit, blind, deaf, accessibility, deafness, traffic safety, law enforcement, vehicle registration, communication, emergency services, commercial driver's license, first responders, public safety, authorized emergency vehicle

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several health-related bills. HB 1871, establishing a maternal health monitoring pilot program, drew support from the Department of Health, the Hawaii State Commission on Status of Women, and the Hawaii affiliate of the American College of Nurse Midwives, with testimony urging provider-neutral language so midwives and other qualified providers would not be excluded. HB 1977, requiring a maternal and infant health information mobile app, received support from ACNM and Philips, which said similar apps in other states improved awareness of services and helped families navigate care; a member asked the Department of Health about implementation time. HB 1858, relating to certificates of fetal deaths, was supported by the Department of Health and clinicians, who said the current statute is outdated and inconsistent with CDC guidance; the department and a physician testified that the bill should shift documentation responsibilities to physicians and APRNs, and members discussed optional versus mandatory issuance language and whether the bill would improve data on home births and transfers. The committee also heard HB 1591, expanding definitions for preceptor and volunteer-based clinical training to improve income tax credits. The Department of Health supported the measure but preferred a similar, broader bill; Taxation suggested clarifying terms; the University of Hawaii and the State Center for Nursing supported it. ACNM asked that midwifery preceptors and Hawaii-based students enrolled in mainland programs be included, while the Hawaii Public Health Institute supported expansion of the program as a workforce solution. HB 1574, on the health care education loan repayment program, also drew broad support, including from the governor, SHPDA, OHA, and health organizations, but ACNM raised concerns that the bill’s 30% Medicaid-client threshold could exclude many providers and limit participation. For HB 1575, creating a feasibility committee on Parkinson’s patient air transport, the Department of Health supported the intent but said transportation is more likely an insurance or benefit issue and suggested redirecting funds to Parkinson’s research; the Michael J. Fox Foundation and the Hawaii Parkinson Association supported the bill, citing inter-island travel barriers and high costs for patients and caregivers. HB 1854, establishing certification of community behavioral health clinics, was supported by the Department of Health and DHS, which said certification would help clinics qualify for enhanced Medicaid reimbursement and expand access; the Attorney General’s office raised a legal concern about the special fund language and recommended a purpose section, and the committee discussed whether the fund would be self-sustaining and noted a possible amendment to change membership language and reduce the board size if the amendment moved forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• it would be a hybrid process.
• And it's a competitive bidding process, or what's that process look like? It was.
• There should be a scoring process.
• And we felt it made the process better.
• There's a challenge process for that.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:32:45.760> will on July 1st and then this process will on July 1st and then this process
• It's already a process that's in law.
• It's already a process that's in law.
• see in the application process see in the application process and<00:38:08.560> in<00:38:
• <01:30:36.600> and it's just a continuing process and it's just a continuing process and you

Keywords: Public Health and Welfare - Room 216, 3 March, 2026; 3:00 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1622, a strike-all amendment to create a pilot program for certain small-community hospitals to receive limited certificate-of-need exemptions. The bill would allow qualifying hospitals to open a geriatric psychiatric unit without a CON, permit each hospital one additional CON exemption for a service otherwise requiring one, cap dialysis-unit exemptions at eight hospitals, continue existing moratoriums with periodic Department of Health review, allow facilities in Issaquena or Humphreys Counties under limited conditions, and add a loser-pays rule for unsuccessful CON court challenges. Technical corrections were made, the strike-all amendment was adopted, and the bill was reported do pass as amended by voice vote. The committee then moved to House Bill 942, where Senator McMahan offered an amendment to allow a Lee County chiropractor to advertise as a neurologic chiropractor and list related credentials. Members questioned whether chiropractic neurology is recognized in Mississippi and raised concerns about the practitioner’s prior discipline by the board, but the chair ruled the amendment germane. The amendment failed on voice vote, and the bill itself then passed and was reported to the floor. The committee next considered House Bill 1034, but no amendment was offered. It then took House Bill 479 off the table. That bill extends the temporary licensing period for psychology and marriage-and-family-therapy boards from 30 to 60 days to allow more time for criminal background checks. Senator Blackwell offered a clarifying amendment to make clear that temporary licenses must be revoked if required background checks or other licensure requirements are insufficient, and that the temporary license does not replace the underlying education, training, and examination requirements. The amendment was adopted and the bill was reported do pass as amended. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 1067, the Rural Health Transformation Program. Senator Hickman explained that the bill would require procurement procedures and reporting for the state’s rural health transformation funds, prioritize projects tied to the original application, and direct funds toward rural and underserved areas such as health professional shortage areas, low-income counties, and places without hospitals. Senators questioned whether the added state rules would layer on top of existing federal requirements and whether the bill could slow distribution or invite litigation, but supporters said it was meant to add transparency and guardrails rather than change the federal program. The bill was discussed at length, but the transcript ends before a final vote on HB 1067.

Transcript Highlights:

• participate in the process participate in the process uh<00:12:37.120> there<00:12:37.279
• So when people go to the Republican, Democrat, they know what they're— >> Process.
• Democracy works best when the rules are fair and the process is honest.
• Closed primaries the process is honest.
• This is already a limited process.

Bills: HB541, SB194

Keywords: PFAS, drinking water, public health, environmental management, liability, agriculture authority, eminent domain, property rights, tax exemption, agriculture center, 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The approval process, the special permit process, all those conditions of approval are pretty much taken
• Chair. through the land use commission process. through the land use commission process.
• >> No, we're in the process of that right now.
• >> Um, primarily, it's the procurement process.
• >> That's not a procurement process issue.

Bills: SB2706, SB2320

Keywords: workforce development, agriculture, biosecurity, pilot program, Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, University of Hawaii, Leeward Community College, DHRD, training, apprenticeship, career pathways, credentialing, job training, internship, hands-on experience, state employment, workforce pipeline, agricultural jobs, biosecurity jobs, general fund appropriation

Summary: The committees first heard SB 2371, which would prioritize lease offers on agrivoltaics parcels for beginning farmers, require annual compliance reports to DAB, authorize penalties for noncompliance, and allow solar facilities on certain agricultural lands. DAB, the State Energy Office, PUC, and Hawaii Farm Bureau generally supported the intent, while OPPSD recommended amendments to preserve agricultural lease affordability and strengthen food-production language. Members questioned whether the bill would meaningfully encourage solar on ag lands, whether beginning farmers would have enough information to use such parcels, and how the bill would interact with Land Use Commission review. The Farm Bureau said agrivoltaics remains challenging and largely in pilot form, and noted the Mililani project as a promising example of dual use. The committees voted to pass SB 2371 with amendments, with one member expressing a preference that it be opened to all farmers rather than only beginning farmers. The next measure, SB 2800, appropriates funds to DAB, DLNR, and ADC for acquisition, repair, and maintenance of irrigation systems. All testifying agencies and the Farm Bureau supported the bill, and members pressed them for estimates of needed funding and the condition of existing systems. DAB cited major repair needs, including Waimea, Molokai, Kahuku, and Kawailoa, and said its backlog could total roughly $65 million; ADC estimated about $35 million for several systems; and DLNR said its current needs for three systems were about $35 million, with the largest cost tied to piping in Kekaha. The committees amended the bill to defer its effective date to July 1, 2050 and to blank out the appropriation amounts in the bill text, with the agencies’ requested amounts to be included in the committee report for consideration. SB 2800 then passed in AEN, Water and Land, and EIG. The final measure discussed was SB 2718, a food hub pilot program beginning in 2028 that would require state departments and UH to source 30% of certain food purchases from local agricultural products, create a nutrition- and ʻāina-based school program, and have DAT partner with a regional aggregator for Native Hawaiian staple crops. DAT, DOH, the Farm Bureau, Food Plus Policy Group, HAPA, and others supported the bill’s intent, while the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation opposed it, saying it is already struggling to meet the current local procurement percentage and faces procurement and quantity barriers, especially for staple items used daily. The testimony focused on whether agencies could realistically meet the higher local purchasing target and whether smaller farms could supply the needed volumes.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we did engage in a process to... ...which didn't previously exist.
• So we'll be waiving items number 18... ...the budget process as well.
• This is the federal grievance process.
• This is the federal grievance process.
• We would plan to have a lot of stakeholder feedback in this process.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major topic was child care and early education, where the Department of Social Services and Department of Finance outlined proposed changes to absorb federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue reductions, shift some funding between child care programs, end funding for prospective pay implementation now that the federal requirement has been rescinded, adjust the alternative payment administration structure, and fund child care infrastructure grants and a Low-Income Investment Fund contract closeout. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the budget makes progress on the structural deficit but recommended maintaining the administration’s solution level, making reserve deposits, and avoiding new ongoing commitments; it also raised concerns about shifting reductions to the California Alternative Payment Program and about the proposed administrative-rate change. Committee members strongly criticized the proposed loss of child care slots and said they would oppose eliminating those slots, while also expressing support for child care as essential infrastructure. The committee then reviewed California State Preschool Program proposals. Finance and CDE described reductions to the preschool COLA from 2.41% to 2.01%, removal of prospective pay funding, and increases for the QRIS block grant, audit support, and rate reform implementation. Trailer bill language would codify age-based rate categories, inclusion-rate documentation, family fee collection rules, portability, and excused absences. CDE supported the QRIS increase and some attendance and family-fee changes, but warned that aligning three- and four-year-old rates could reduce support for three-year-olds and that the budget does not fully cover enrollment growth. Members also questioned whether the preschool and child care slot reductions should be reallocated rather than terminated, and the administration said the reductions were intended to reflect current utilization and avoid harm to currently enrolled families. The hearing then moved to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS said the May Revision includes a one-time CalFood augmentation, funding to cover federal SNAP administrative cost-share pressures, and additional staffing and technical assistance to implement HR 1 changes, including the able-bodied adults without dependents time limit and new non-citizen eligibility rules. The department estimated HR 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people, with roughly 806,000 adults potentially subject to the time limit and about 34,000 non-citizens expected to lose eligibility once fully implemented. Members pressed for stronger harm mitigation, including a $98 million backfill to protect families from losing food benefits, and raised concerns about county workload and the “chilling effect” on immigrant participation. The final portion of the transcript began the IHSS presentation, noting a revised budget of $33.7 billion total funds and $12.8 billion General Fund, with proposed reductions tied to Medi-Cal asset-limit changes and other federal conformity items.

Transcript Highlights:

• Such as due process or equal protection.
• Is there a process? To conduct audits? Is there a process for doing that?
• They do not approve a process or safeguard.
• So the audit standards require you to do a planning process.
• The peer review process, who are the peers? Who are the peers?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• 07.760> impacted process, claims for the impacted process, claims for the impacted benefits<00
• process process the<00:42:47.440> the<00:42:47.839> sort<00:42:48.000> of<00:42
• >> That’s right. >> All right. prepayment review process. and that prepayment review process. and that
• Um the 4% the prepayment review process.
• prepayment review process in 2026? prepayment review process in 2026?

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: Minnesota Management and Budget officials presented the February 2026 budget and economic forecast, saying the state remains in a strong financial position but faces continued structural imbalance and significant uncertainty. Commissioner Aaron Campbell said the FY 2026-27 balance is now projected at more than $3.7 billion, up about $1.3 billion from November, and the FY 2028-29 planning period is projected to end with a $377 million positive balance. He emphasized that the improvement comes largely from higher projected revenues, especially individual income and corporate franchise taxes, but warned that the state is increasingly reliant on more volatile sources such as capital gains, interest income, and corporate profits. State Economist Dr. Anthony Becker said the national outlook improved slightly, with stronger projected GDP, consumer spending, and investment, but weaker payroll growth and ongoing trade-policy uncertainty. He noted that the forecast was complicated by missing federal data because of the federal shutdown, and that tariffs, immigration policy, equity markets, and possible AI-related shifts all present risks. Revenue projections were raised for the current biennium, including individual income tax receipts, sales tax revenue, corporate franchise tax revenue, and other revenues, while Becker stressed that federal funding threats, especially involving Medicaid and other entitlement programs, could materially alter the outlook. State Budget Director Anna Mingi said general fund spending in the current biennium is projected to be $68 million lower than previously estimated, but planning-year spending is up $152 million. The biggest spending changes came from education, where special education costs rose sharply after updated local spending data, and from human services, where a new prepayment review process for certain Medicaid benefits reduced projected spending by $133 million this biennium and $105 million in the next. She also said discretionary inflation is now estimated at $1.04 billion, up $104 million from November. Campbell closed by saying the state’s reserve remains at a record $3.8 billion and that Minnesota’s AAA bond rating and reserve policy help protect against downturns. He cautioned, however, that the long-term structural imbalance remains about $3.4 billion in the planning years, or $2.3 billion excluding discretionary inflation, and urged policymakers to offset any new spending with reductions. No votes or formal actions were taken; the meeting was a presentation and question-and-answer session on the forecast.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm learning a lot about the death process.
• so i understand ...their application processed.
• It shifts from resolving claims to arguing about the process.
• And it's an ongoing process.
• And it's an ongoing process.

Bills: HB2180, HB2184, HB2188, HB2194, HB2206, HB2321, HB2322, HB2438, HB2442, HB2448, HB2727, HB2797

Keywords: appropriation, funding, University of Arizona, education, state budget, fetal death, funeral homes, informed consent, abortion, women's rights, medical assistance, emotional support, language acquisition, early intervention, hearing impairment, grant program, deaf education, health care, insurance claims, prior authorization

Summary: The Committee on Health and Human Services opened with remarks about shortening meeting times and then heard a JLBC presentation on the effects of H.R. 1 on SNAP. JLBC staff explained that H.R. 1 expands SNAP work requirements, raises the state share of SNAP administrative costs from 50% to 75% beginning in FY 2027, and could require Arizona to pay a share of benefits if its SNAP error rate exceeds 6%. JLBC estimated the administrative cost increase at about $33 million in FY 2027 and $44 million in FY 2028, and said a 2024 error rate of 8.8% could trigger about $139 million in state benefit costs under the new federal formula. The committee then considered HB 2797, which requires DES to regularly review data from other agencies to verify SNAP eligibility, post fraud and noncompliance data, and address out-of-state EBT purchases. Supporters said it would improve program integrity and help Arizona avoid federal cost-sharing penalties; the bill passed 7-5. The committee next heard HB 2180, which appropriates $2.5 million in FY 2027 to the University of Arizona for AZ REACH, a statewide hospital transfer coordination service. Supporters from rural hospitals and the health system described it as a useful, voluntary service that speeds transfers and reduces burden on physicians, while one health system representative asked for better operational coordination. The bill passed 11-1. HB 2184, as amended, would extend fetal death certificate filing requirements to fetal deaths at or before 20 weeks if requested by the mother and require notice of the option to transfer remains to a funeral home before an abortion. Supporters, including a mortuary owner and parents who had experienced miscarriages, said it would give grieving families dignity and closure; opponents raised concerns about reproductive rights and language in the bill. The committee adopted the Bliss amendment and passed the bill 7-4-1. HB 2188, as amended, created a Language Acquisition Grant Program for services to deaf or hard-of-hearing infants and toddlers. Supporters said it would streamline funding and preserve family choice among spoken language, ASL, or both, while an opponent argued the bill should more explicitly ensure equal access to ASL and Deaf Culture services; the bill passed 12-0. The committee also considered three more H.R. 1-related SNAP bills. HB 2442 would require able-bodied adults under 60 receiving SNAP to participate in an employment and training program unless exempt; supporters said it would connect recipients to work and training, and it passed 7-5. HB 2448 would bar DES from seeking work-requirement waivers or discretionary exemptions unless authorized by law; supporters said it would prevent broad waivers and improve employment outcomes, and it also passed 7-5. Finally, HB 2206 would require DES to reduce the SNAP payment error rate to 3% by 2030, submit annual progress reports, and face corrective action if targets are missed. Supporters said it would save taxpayer money and improve accountability, while opponents argued the target was too aggressive without more staff or funding and could strain DES; the bill was still under discussion at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• An outline specific requirements for the process, including a clear and conspicuous notice the process
• It's not a matter of due process or not to process your.
• We appreciate efforts to modernize the process.
• When you first retire, it takes a long grueling process.
• We have work with all people through that process.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It makes it easier to process everything. And then.
• And then obviously y'all have to give somebody some due process.
• We still have a process for them to get licensed in Texas at that level.
• For, against, obviously to protect the agency or to give somebody due process.
• At the same time, they processed over 100. thousand renewals, and also process licenses for non-physicians

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• An Article 5 convention is a process outlined in the U.S.
• This is the process used for all 27 amendments to date.
• This process is full of built-in safeguards.
• This process is a process intended to benefit both parties because it has nothing to do with parties.
• This process is a process intended to benefit both parties because it has nothing to do with parties.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing of the Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs was opened by Chair Joe McGonagle and Vice Chair Senator Mike Rush, who noted that Chair John Velis was deployed with the Massachusetts National Guard. The chairs explained the hybrid format, three-minute testimony limit, live streaming, and filing deadlines, and said the committee would hear 11 House bills and eight Senate bills dealing with federal and overseas issues. Much of the hearing centered on competing resolutions about Article 5 constitutional conventions, along with related resolutions on D.C. statehood, child labor, Citizens United, and Cambodia. Supporters of H. 4692 and S. 284, a joint resolution to rescind all prior Massachusetts Article 5 convention applications, argued that old resolutions from the 1930s and 1970s could be used to count Massachusetts toward the 34-state threshold for calling a federal constitutional convention. Testifiers from Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, the ACLU, Reproductive Equity Now, labor groups, and others warned that a convention would have no clear rules, could not be reliably limited to specific topics, and could put civil rights, reproductive rights, labor protections, and other constitutional protections at risk. Several speakers also cited a recent federal lawsuit and said the safest course was to remove outdated applications from the books. A large opposing panel testified in support of H. 3888, a resolution calling for a Convention of States to propose amendments limiting federal power, imposing fiscal restraints, and establishing term limits. Supporters argued that Article 5 provides a lawful way to address federal overreach, debt, and congressional stagnation, and said the process would be limited by state applications and ratification by 38 states. Some committee members and witnesses raised concerns about a runaway convention, broad language in the resolution, and whether Congress could or should set rules for such a convention. Representative Gentile also testified in support of several related resolutions on overturning Citizens United, D.C. statehood, and the child labor amendment, while Representative Howard and Representative Tongue supported a Cambodia resolution condemning political oppression and urging free and fair elections. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I think the report perhaps is more thematic, this annual process.
• Is there something that, you know, we're trying to improve a process?
• Everyone is part of that process.
• Anecdotally, we saw great impact from engaging with this process.
• That unity made actionizing our four pillars a smoother process.

Summary: The joint informational and oversight hearing focused on community schools in California, with members emphasizing that the purpose was to examine effectiveness, implementation, and sustainability rather than the Governor’s budget proposal. The California Department of Education described the California Community Schools Partnership Program, created in 2021 and funded with more than $4 billion, including planning, implementation, extension, and county coordination grants. Officials said nearly 2,500 schools are participating and highlighted the statewide technical assistance structure, including the State Transformational Assistance Center, eight regional centers, county offices, and CDE support. Researchers from the Learning Policy Institute and UCLA presented early findings and implementation data. LPI reported reductions in chronic absenteeism and suspensions, along with gains in math and English language arts, with especially large benefits for Black students and other historically underserved groups. UCLA described the Annual Progress Report as a statewide improvement tool showing growth in capacity-building, shared decision-making, whole-child supports, and continuous improvement. Members asked about how the reports measure outcomes, how to interpret outliers, and how to distinguish community schools effects from other concurrent initiatives; presenters said matched comparison methods and deeper case-study work are being used, with additional statewide findings expected in June. Panelists from Oakland Unified, LAUSD/UTLA, San Diego Unified, and advocacy organizations described key elements of success: integrated student supports, strong family and student engagement, collaborative leadership, community partnerships, and school-site decision-making. They gave examples such as wellness centers, dual enrollment, student senates, parent leadership, and community campaigns that built trust and increased participation. Members also raised concerns about sustainability, implementation fidelity, and whether community schools improve participation in LCAP processes. Presenters said major barriers include unclear early guidance, the need for a mindset shift away from top-down models, and uncertainty about long-term funding for coordinators and other staff. The panel’s recommendations centered on stable ongoing funding, stronger technical assistance, shared governance, and embedding community schools practices into district and county systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can anyone comment on that or relate to the process and your role as the evaluators in this process?
• I can weigh in as an attorney embedded in the process, not as a provider.
• The time constraints don't align with the civil commitment or AOT process.
• I think there's some process and procedure there that could be improved.
• and putting them into the civil process when that's needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've had success developing processes to disrupt these places.
• We've had a success of developing processes to disrupt these places.
• We have one that's continuing in that process.
• It doesn't have to appoint an agent for service of process.
• It doesn't have to appoint an agent for service of process.

Bills: HB111

Summary: The committee heard a long series of House bills, with most measures laid out by Senate sponsors and then left pending after brief public testimony. Early bills focused on construction and licensing issues, including HB 305 on prompt payment for public construction audits, HB 5093 on restoring public access to notary contact information, HB 2037 on updating landlord-tenant repair and security deposit rules, HB 4214 on a centralized public information request contact database, and HB 5435 exempting higher education institutions from a 90-day notice requirement for certain public-private partnership projects. Testimony was generally supportive on these bills, and no votes were taken; each was left pending. The committee also considered several transparency and regulatory bills. HB 111 would expand the Public Information Act to certain nonprofit state associations and narrow some attorney-client and working-paper exceptions, with supporters arguing it would improve oversight of public funds and critics questioning the scope and thresholds. HB 5129 would protect occupational license holders’ personal identifying information from disclosure without consent, HB 4350 would allow peace officers to redact personal information from online real property records, HB 4748 would authorize multiple-award state purchasing contracts, and HB 4765 would clean up code enforcement officer licensing rules. HB 4134 would allow motor vehicle creditors to charge limited fees for electronic payment options while requiring a free alternative, and HB 1043 would direct a study of blockchain-based property title records; both drew testimony, with some concern about the practical effects and vendor implications of the blockchain study. Several bills addressed insurance, workforce, and digital-asset regulation. HB 3520 would reduce the insurance coverage required for transportation network companies during the period when a driver is en route to pick up a passenger, drawing support from Texans for Lawsuit Reform and opposition from trial lawyers who argued the higher coverage better protects the public. HB 3320 would create a self-insurance pool for religious institutions, with TDI explaining it would still be regulated but operate under a special statutory framework. HB 4233 would modernize rules for digital asset service providers by removing certain auditor-access requirements and updating reporting and licensing provisions. HB 3923 would reduce bachelor’s-degree requirements for some state jobs, though Every Texan argued low pay, not degree requirements, is the main driver of turnover. HB 4518 would create a legal structure for decentralized unincorporated nonprofit associations tied to blockchain governance; business law experts opposed it as unnecessary and potentially risky, while crypto advocates supported it. Finally, HB 1803 would join an interstate compact for dentists and dental hygienists, with supporters citing workforce shortages and opponents saying Texas already licenses quickly and that the compact could weaken state oversight. Throughout the hearing, the committee repeatedly closed testimony and left bills pending, and a quorum was eventually established before later items were heard.

Transcript Highlights:

• by which it could be a public process intersecting with each of the local municipalities.
• by which it could be a public process intersecting with each of the local municipalities.
• There's a process that I would expect that if somebody who was part of that congregation or somebody
• So I wanted to let you know that we had a very careful process for drafting this bill.
• I wanted to let you know that we had a very careful process for drafting this bill.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies held its first public hearing of the session, chaired by Rep. Carole Fiola with Sen. Barry Finegold. After housekeeping on livestreaming, virtual testimony, and written testimony deadlines, the committee heard testimony on several bills, with the main focus on S. 303/H. 503/S. 305 and H. 491, all related to worker ownership and business succession. Testimony generally supported expanding employee ownership, right of first refusal for workers, and incentives for owners to sell to employee groups. Speakers from worker co-ops, technical assistance organizations, lenders, and business owners said these measures could preserve local businesses, protect jobs, build worker wealth, and help communities retain valued services and storefronts. On S. 303, Vincent Lawrence Dixon described a proposal to create tools such as a special community trustee, right of first refusal, and community institution landmarks to help communities preserve important local properties and uses when owners cease operations. On H. 491 and the employee-ownership bills, witnesses including Matthew Page Lieberman, Caleb from Circus Cooperative Cafe, Sarah Acefa of Dorchester Food Co-op, Halsey Platt, Kevin O'Brien, John Abrams, Virginia Berman, Stacey Cordero, Adrian Roman, Alex Popali, Adam Trott, and Ethan Tupelo emphasized that worker-owned businesses can be more resilient, support democratic participation, and help with business transitions as owners retire or close. Committee members asked questions about the tax incentive threshold, the timing and mechanics of the right of first refusal, and whether the bills would affect sale prices or business succession. Rep. Kristen Kassner also testified on H. 490, which would create a special commission to inventory the Commonwealth’s built environment, infrastructure, permitting, and land-use barriers to help Massachusetts adapt vacant or underused spaces for the next economy. She said the commission would help identify opportunities for housing, climate and energy tech, advanced manufacturing, and other uses, and members discussed commission composition and data sources. At the end of the hearing, the chair read a series of additional bills into the record, noted an upcoming Economic Development Expo, and the committee adjourned after a motion and second.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was thinking about the process of accreditation that a lot of law enforcement agencies go through.
• First, programs should use a clear and competitive process when awarding or expanding grants.
• The Digital Navigator Program had several breakdowns in this process.
• It was a really wonderful collaborative process, and we're very grateful to be here today.
• Of all, to create some sort of a template that says rule number one, it's a competitive process.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee subcommittee heard three State Auditor’s Office performance audits: implementation of the Law Enforcement Training and Community Safety Act, Washington’s digital equity planning, and the Department of Commerce’s Digital Navigator Program. In the law enforcement training audit, the State Auditor found the Criminal Justice Training Commission had developed most required training content but had not developed all required topics, lacked a systematic project management approach, and had weak tools to ensure participation and compliance. Auditors said most officers had not completed the required 40 hours, patrol tactics training was a major bottleneck, and the Commission’s reporting did not clearly show statewide compliance. The Commission said it generally agreed with the recommendations and had begun implementing some changes. Committee members raised concerns about staffing, liability, incentives, and whether the law had enough enforcement “teeth.” In the digital equity audit, auditors said Washington lacked a comprehensive, unified statewide plan, a designated leader, and reliable funding for digital equity efforts. They said existing plans were fragmented, with the NTIA-approved plan the most complete but no longer fully funded after federal changes. The State Auditor recommended the legislature establish oversight authority and require a lead organization to coordinate and evaluate statewide digital equity efforts and develop a unified plan. The Department of Commerce and Office of Equity agreed with the need for clearer leadership and coordination, and a public witness described ongoing coalition and local planning work. Committee members asked about best practices from other states and whether the auditor could provide additional research on coordination models. In the Digital Navigator Program audit, the State Auditor concluded Commerce did not consistently follow core grant-management practices, including competitive award processes, vetting of grantees, clear contracts, performance monitoring, and reimbursement controls. Auditors said Commerce expanded grants without a new competition, lacked adequate documentation and reporting, and paid out millions without sufficient support; they also cited management decisions that overrode staff concerns. Commerce said it had already begun major contract-management reforms, created a new contracts and compliance structure, and was working on risk assessments, documentation standards, and staff training. Members pressed Commerce on accountability, possible recoupment of improper payments, ethics issues, and whether the agency had clear performance metrics for the program. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended after public testimony and committee discussion.